Re: [epp-dev] Parallel Package leverages CPP package

[Jeff Johnston <jjohnstn@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Yes.

On 03/20/2012 04:02 PM, Doug Schaefer wrote:
> Yeah, I'm adding the autotools feature to CDT's. Jeff, does that mean we
> can remove the linuxtools.autotools feature from the includes?
>
> On 12-03-20 4:01 PM, "Jeff Johnston"<jjohnstn@xxxxxxxxxx>  wrote:
>
> > Hey Beth,
> >
> > The autotools feature in the parallel feature.xml should be changed to
> > reference the new CDT one (org.eclipse.cdt.autotools). Other than that,
> > everything else from linuxtools remains the same.
> >
> > -- Jeff J.
> >
> > On 03/20/2012 03:36 PM, Doug Schaefer wrote:
> > > Hey, Beth. The changes are already applied for Linux tools. I don't
> > > think I need to change them any further at this point, at least for M6.
> > >
> > > From: Beth Tibbitts<tibbitts@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:tibbitts@xxxxxxxxxx>>
> > > Reply-To: Eclipse Packaging Project<epp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > <mailto:epp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
> > > Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 13:21:13 -0400
> > > To: Eclipse Packaging Project<epp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > <mailto:epp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
> > > Subject: [epp-dev] Parallel Package leverages CPP package
> > >
> > > I was just going to update the Parallel package today too, Doug.
> > >
> > > My original contents were CPP, plus some of Linux tools and of course
> > > PTP and Photran.
> > > I think I should get the new CPP list now.
> > > Let me know when you are done.
> > >
> > >
> > > ...Beth
> > >
> > > Beth Tibbitts
> > > Eclipse Parallel Tools Platform http://eclipse.org/ptp
> > > IBM STG - High Performance Computing Tools
> > > Mailing Address: IBM Corp., 745 West New Circle Road, Lexington, KY
> > > 40511
> > >
> > > Inactive hide details for Doug Schaefer ---03/20/2012 12:20:43 PM---Hey
> > > gang, Looking through the changes Linuxtools made to thDoug Schaefer
> > > ---03/20/2012 12:20:43 PM---Hey gang, Looking through the changes
> > > Linuxtools made to the CPP package to merge the two, I noticed
> > >
> > >
> > >      From:
> > >
> > > 	
> > > Doug Schaefer<dschaefer@xxxxxxx<mailto:dschaefer@xxxxxxx>>
> > >
> > >      To:
> > >
> > > 	
> > > "epp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:epp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>"<epp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > <mailto:epp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>>,
> > >
> > >      Date:
> > >
> > > 	
> > > 03/20/2012 12:20 PM
> > >
> > >      Subject:
> > >
> > > 	
> > > [epp-dev] Include versus requires/import
> > >
> > >      Sent by:
> > >
> > > 	
> > > epp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:epp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Hey gang,
> > >
> > > Looking through the changes Linuxtools made to the CPP package to merge
> > > the two, I noticed that they Include their features as opposed to add
> > > them to the required section. I assume this was to allow for
> > > optionality. Should we be including all our features this way? What's
> > > the difference between include and require?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Doug._______________________________________________
> > > epp-dev mailing list
> > > epp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:epp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epp-dev
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________ epp-dev mailing list
> > > epp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:epp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epp-dev
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > epp-dev mailing list
> > > epp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epp-dev
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > epp-dev mailing list
> > epp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epp-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> epp-dev mailing list
> epp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epp-dev